Order of variables in a Jacobian?

  • Thread starter Thread starter peripatein
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Jacobian Variables
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the formulation of the Jacobian matrix for implicit functions, specifically in the context of determining the partial derivatives ∂u/∂y and ∂v/∂y while keeping x fixed. The original poster seeks clarification on the correct order of variables in the Jacobian and the reasoning behind it.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the correct formulation of the Jacobian given two implicit functions and questions the reasoning behind the correct order of variables. Other participants discuss their own methods of forming Jacobians and highlight the importance of the determinant's absolute value.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their approaches and questioning the assumptions related to the formulation of the Jacobian. Some guidance has been provided regarding the determinant's significance, but no consensus has been reached on the specific formulation in question.

Contextual Notes

There is a repeated emphasis on the need for clarity regarding the roles of dependent and independent variables in the Jacobian, as well as the implications of different formulations. The original poster expresses uncertainty about their initial formulation and seeks deeper understanding.

peripatein
Messages
868
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Homework Statement



I was hoping someone could please explain the order of variables in a Jacobian. I mean, once the dependent and independent variables have been identified, how should the Jacobian be formulated. For instance, supposing I have two implicit functions F(x,y,u,v) and G(x,y,u,v) where x and y are independent. I wish to find ∂u/∂y (x is fixed) and ∂v/∂y (x is fixed). How should the Jacobian be formulated, namely -J[(F,G)/(y,u)]/J[(F,G)/(v,u)] or -J[(F,G)/(u,y)]/J[(F,G)/(u,v)]? I happen to know the former formulation is the correct one, but why?! How could I have known and initially written it in that form?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider two functions ##f## and ##g## of two variables y and x.
I always form my Jacobian like
$$
\mathcal{J} = \begin{pmatrix}
f_x & f_y\\
g_x & g_y
\end{pmatrix}
$$
However, I believe in some books it has my rows as columns.
 
What's usually important is the absolute value of the determinant of the jacobian matrix. In which case none of these variations matter.
 
peripatein said:
Hi,

Homework Statement



I was hoping someone could please explain the order of variables in a Jacobian. I mean, once the dependent and independent variables have been identified, how should the Jacobian be formulated. For instance, supposing I have two implicit functions F(x,y,u,v) and G(x,y,u,v) where x and y are independent. I wish to find ∂u/∂y (x is fixed) and ∂v/∂y (x is fixed). How should the Jacobian be formulated, namely -J[(F,G)/(y,u)]/J[(F,G)/(v,u)] or -J[(F,G)/(u,y)]/J[(F,G)/(u,v)]? I happen to know the former formulation is the correct one, but why?! How could I have known and initially written it in that form?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


You can always get it from first principles (and doing this once in your life is a useful exercise). If we fix y and let x change by Δx = h, then we have:
[tex]F(x+h,y,u + \Delta u, v + \Delta v) = 0 = F(x,y,u,v) + F_x h + F_u \Delta u + F_v \Delta v \\<br /> G(x+h,y,u + \Delta u, v + \Delta v) = 0 = G(x,y,u,v) + G_x h + G_u \Delta u + G_v \Delta v[/tex]
where all the partials are evaluated at the original point (x,y,u,v). Thus,
[tex]\pmatrix{ \Delta u \\ \Delta v} = <br /> - \pmatrix{F_u & F_v\\G_u&G_v}^{-1}\pmatrix{F_x \\ G_x} h,[/tex]
so
[tex]\pmatrix{\partial u/ \partial x \\ \partial v / \partial x} =<br /> - \pmatrix{F_u & F_v\\G_u&G_v}^{-1}\pmatrix{F_x \\ G_x}.[/tex]
For a 2x2 matrix we get the inverse by swapping the diagonal elements, changing the sign of the off-diagonal elements and dividing by the determinant:
[tex]\pmatrix{a & b \\ c & d }^{-1} = \frac{1}{ad-bc} \pmatrix{d & -b \\ -c & a},[/tex] so you can get explicit formulas for u_x and v_x.
 

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K